Qualcomm Says Tech Group Supporting Apple is 'Misdirecting' ITC With 'Coordinated Effort'

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
46,735
8,950



Last week, the Computer & Communications Industry Association, a lobbying group representing Google, eBay, Amazon, Microsoft, Netflix, Intel, Samsung, and other tech companies, asked the United States International Trade Commission to reject Qualcomm's request for an import ban on some of Apple's iPhone and iPad models that use Intel chips.

The group said that banning Apple products that use Intel chips would enable Qualcomm's anti-competitive behavior and cause supply issues, resulting in harm to consumers.


Qualcomm today responded to the CCIA in a court filing, accusing the group of launching a "coordinated effort aimed at misdirecting" the ITC, reports Reuters. Qualcomm also said that the import ban it requested is not focused on Intel's chips, but the patented technology used in iPhones with Intel chips.
In its filing on Monday, Qualcomm argued that its import ban is not actually about Intel's chips, but instead concerns the patented technology that surrounds the Intel chips in current versions of the iPhone. Thus a ban on importing the phones would not hurt competition in the long term, Qualcomm argued. "Apple can purchase and utilize any LTE modem it chooses so long as it does not infringe Qualcomm's asserted patents," the company wrote.
Apple and Qualcomm have been embroiled in an ongoing legal battle following Apple's decision to sue Qualcomm in January for charging unfair royalties and refusing to pay quarterly rebates.

The fight between the two companies has escalated since then, most recently leading Qualcomm to file a patent infringement lawsuit against Apple and request an import ban for some iPhone models.

In a statement to Reuters on Qualcomm's filing this afternoon, Apple once again complained that Qualcomm makes a single chip in the iPhone but "for years [has] been demanding a percentage of the total cost of [Apple] products - effectively taxing Apple's innovation."

Article Link: Qualcomm Says Tech Group Supporting Apple is 'Misdirecting' ITC With 'Coordinated Effort'
 

GrumpyMom

macrumors G3
Sep 11, 2014
8,406
11,694
How many companies make modem technology suitable for use in IPhones? Does Apple have only Intel and Qualcomm to choose from?
 
  • Like
Reactions: apolloa

kemal

macrumors 68000
Dec 21, 2001
1,537
1,627
Nebraska
Finally I understand how industry works. If you want to build a less expensive widget, charge the consumer less and it will cost less to build.
 

kdarling

macrumors P6
Qualcomm chose to go after them all in such a manner. Now they are complaining that the counterpunch is coming at the same time from all their extortees?
It's less about Qualcomm than about simple self preservation.

Everyone in that organization is thinking forward to the next time that someone goes to the ITC about banning THEM. So they want to discourage import bans in general.

Likewise, this exact same group lobbied the Supreme Court to rule for Samsung and against Apple in that recent design patent reward appeal. (Which SCOTUS did.). That was because they all saw themselves as possibly being in the same infringement situation one day.

Companies looking out for their own future interests.
 
Last edited:

Michaelgtrusa

macrumors 604
Oct 13, 2008
7,901
1,811
If it's your tech you have the right to use it as you wish. As for anti-competitive behavior, what about china? Has everyone forgotten about their anti-competitive behavior?
 

unobtainium

macrumors 68020
Mar 27, 2011
2,301
3,114
In a statement to Reuters on Qualcomm's filing this afternoon, Apple once again complained that Qualcomm makes a single chip in the iPhone but "for years [has] been demanding a percentage of the total cost of [Apple] products - effectively taxing Apple's innovation."
Oh, the irony. Apple takes, what, 30% for in-app purchases? That's what I call "taxing the innovation of others."

Having said that, Qualcomm is obviously full of it, and doesn't stand a chance here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cronbo

kidaje

macrumors regular
Mar 6, 2012
141
239
So qualcomm charge a percentage?

So qualcom will get more for the chip if it is in a iPhone 7 plus 256gb then a iPhone SE 32gb.

And its the same chip?
 

AdmiralTriggerH

macrumors newbie
Apr 5, 2011
12
12
Oh, the irony. Apple takes, what, 30% for in-app purchases? That's what I call "taxing the innovation of others."
Well that 30% provides you quite a lot, marketting, distribution, support and resources to help develop your apps.
Considering what people get for that 30% it's a pretty good deal. Compare that to publishers in other industries, music, books etc and it's damn good.
 

hotgril

Suspended
Jul 4, 2017
128
56
Artsakh, Armenia
I'm on Apple/etc's side (with my limited knowledge), but I still find it disturbing that others are ganging up on Qualcomm... because how do they do it? It's "lobbying," whatever that means exactly. This sounds like a judicial matter, so I don't know how they're supposed to be involved.
 

kdarling

macrumors P6
So qualcomm charge a percentage?
Yes, the same rate method that Nokia, Ericsson, Samsung, Motorola, LG, et al use.

Despite what Apple wants, the pricing method is not the issue other companies are that concerned with. Even the China government... who can do almost anything they wish... recently agreed for Qcom to continue that method.

Their complaints are about things like not getting fair trade for their patents, and having to license all Qcom's IP even if they only use some.

So qualcom will get more for the chip if it is in a iPhone 7 plus 256gb then a iPhone SE 32gb. And its the same chip?
Has nothing to do with the cost of chips. It's about the value their IP adds, relative to the cost of the phone.

In a similar fashion, Apple charges higher priced apps more royalties even though the only increase in Apple's cost is a minor increase in the money transfer fee.

In both situations, higher priced products subsidize the lower cost ones. And in both cases, it's the quantity of lower priced ones which enables the market to be big enough to be profitable for makers.

Well that 30% provides you quite a lot, marketting, distribution, support and resources to help develop your apps.
A lot of developers would argue that 30% doesn't buy much in unique advertising or discovery. And for companies that could host their own app store, being locked to Apple's garden is an extra cost.

Qualcomm's 3.25% gets you 3G/4G technology born out of spending decades and billions in R&D. Hell of a lot more value, relatively speaking.
 
Last edited:

justperry

macrumors G4
Aug 10, 2007
10,249
5,420
I'm a rolling stone.
If it's your tech you have the right to use it as you wish. As for anti-competitive behavior, what about china? Has everyone forgotten about their anti-competitive behavior?
Honest question, why do you blame china in your posts lately?
Plenty of companies in the west went to China or outsourced to China for a reason, one of the main reasons are:

We want cheaper goods.
Stockholders want to get even more return on their investments.

The Chinese aren't Dumb at all, what would you do if you live there?

Note: We and stockholders are 'You and I' in the west
 
Last edited:

kdarling

macrumors P6
You know they're in trouble when their public statements sound like Sean Spicer.
True, but you should also check out Apple's lawsuits ;)

They read like some Appleinsider articles: they start with a bogus conclusion and work backwards, using the conclusion as "evidence".

E.g. the rate is too high for us, we're only making hundreds of billions in profit, woe is us. We need even more profit margin next year or Wall Street will diss Tim Cook. Can't have that. We only want to pay what we want to. Therefore we don't think the asking rate is fair. Therefore it must not be FRAND. Therefore wanting us to pay the same rate everyone else has paid for decades, is Apple extortion.

As if Apple would lower their prices to buyers and pass on the savings. Sure :rolleyes:. Now, a lot of people here constantly claim that making high profits is a good thing. If so, then that applies to all companies, not just Apple.

A savvy user might prefer that any extra money went towards Qualcomm's 5/6G future R&D, which will benefit all of us the same as it did with 3/4G, rather than just get stashed away into Apple's offshore shell companies' bank accounts, never to be seen again. :eek:
 
Last edited:

Michaelgtrusa

macrumors 604
Oct 13, 2008
7,901
1,811
Honest question, why do you blame china in your posts lately?
Plenty of companies in the west went to China or outsourced to China for a reason, one of the main reasons are:

We want cheaper goods.
Stockholders want to get even more return on their investments.

The Chinese aren't Dumb at all, what would you do if you live there?

Note: We and stockholders are 'You and I' in the west
If I lived there i would be trying to escape. What i'm saying is, look at the real threat that some can't seem to see.
 

Kaibelf

Suspended
Apr 29, 2009
2,445
7,083
Silicon Valley, CA
A lot of developers would argue that 30% doesn't buy much in unique advertising or discovery. And for companies that could host their own app store, being locked to Apple's garden is an extra cost.

Qualcomm's 3.25% gets you 3G/4G technology born out of spending decades and billions in R&D. Hell of a lot more value, relatively speaking.
They are welcome to go try to market on their own then. No one's being misled here, and no one is forced to stay on the App Store. They have a number of services they can use to market, and are more than welcome to set up their own servers, update infrastructure, and payment processing. Apple's not a soup kitchen, and they set a very stable, specific price. People can take it or leave it, as this not a spice bazaar where people haggle to get side deals.
 

justperry

macrumors G4
Aug 10, 2007
10,249
5,420
I'm a rolling stone.
If I lived there i would be trying to escape. What i'm saying is, look at the real threat that some can't seem to see.
The thread is that China gets bigger than the states, your live gets affected, if you'll loose out then move to the better place, which will be China.
America has not always been the biggest and strongest, there will be a time it's weaker than others again, that's just the way it is, or what do you want, start a war, you could just move to China instead.
 

kdarling

macrumors P6
They are welcome to go try to market on their own then. No one's being misled here, and no one is forced to stay on the App Store.
You're joking, right? A developer who wants to reach all buyers is forced to stay.

In fact, not allowing the normal user to access any other stores is exactly why countries like Italy are contemplating new laws that would fine Apple for locking its users and developers into their own store.

Ironically, Steve Jobs himself used to rail against the carriers being what he called "orifices", for gating ringtones and apps. Which they did they for the exact same reasons that Jobs later made his own even tighter orifice - the Apple App Store - the reasons being censorship, quality control, safety and greed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tooltalk

gtg465x

macrumors 6502
Sep 12, 2016
296
267
Well that 30% provides you quite a lot, marketting, distribution, support and resources to help develop your apps.
Considering what people get for that 30% it's a pretty good deal. Compare that to publishers in other industries, music, books etc and it's damn good.
Pffft. 99% of apps in the App Store are never featured, so receive no marketing. And what support and resources are you talking about? Developers pay $100 per year for an Apple developer account, which gets you access to development resources and "support". I put support in quotes because you don't get any direct access to Apple engineers or support, but rather a support forum where most questions only get answered by other paying developers, not by Apple themselves. So if we're already paying $100 a year for resources and "support", what does that extra 30% of our revenue go to again? Distribution, which could probably be covered by 1-5% of app revenue, and the other 25-29% just lines Apple's pockets. It is not a "pretty good deal" for anyone but Apple. It's their platform and product we're developing for, so they have every right to charge whatever percentage they want, but what they charge far outweighs the benefits, services, and resources they provide.
 

unobtainium

macrumors 68020
Mar 27, 2011
2,301
3,114
Well that 30% provides you quite a lot, marketting, distribution, support and resources to help develop your apps.
Considering what people get for that 30% it's a pretty good deal. Compare that to publishers in other industries, music, books etc and it's damn good.
Yeah, and Apple gets a lot from Qualcomm. I'm just drawing a parallel and pointing out the hypocrisy of Apple's statement.